Fireworks as Clinton Rebuts GOP Charges

Above, video of the exchange between Sen. Ron Johnson and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

WASHINGTON — Secretary of State Hillary Clinton mounted a table-banging defense of the administration’s depiction of the Benghazi attacks in the aftermath of the assault of the U.S. diplomatic post and annex during her Senate testimony Wednesday.

Sen. Ron Johnson (R., Wis.) accused U.N. Amb. Susan Rice of “purposefully misleading the American public” when she said the attack grew out of a protest, an account the administration later dropped as untrue.

“The American people could have known that within days,” if Mrs. Clinton had spoken with State Department officials who had been evacuated from the scene, Mr. Johnson said.

“With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans,” Mrs. Clinton said, raising her voice and hammering her fist on the table. “Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided they’d go kill some Americans?

“What difference at this point does it make?”

In the exchange, in which she was frequently interrupted by Mr. Johnson, Mrs. Clinton said that she did not want to speak with the evacuees before the Federal Bureau of Investigation and an independent Accountability Review Board conducted their investigatory interviews. State officials wanted to avoid interfering with ongoing investigations, she said.

Mr. Johnson called that response “a good excuse.”

“No, it’s a fact,” Mrs. Clinton responded, adding that the accountability board concluded that it still remains unclear what the militants were up to prior to the attacks.

What is clear, she said, is that the attackers were terrorists. “We have no doubt they were terrorists. They were militants. They attacked us. They killed our people.”

On Sept. 15, 2012, Ms. Rice received her briefing materials with the CIA-authored talking points referencing the attack emerging from a protest. That day, the CIA began receiving reports that there had not been a protest.

But it didn’t change its assessment until five days later, when it concluded there had not been a protest based on additional information, including video footage. Intelligence officials say that detail, while incorrect, was not a particularly important detail when it comes to determining what transpired at the embassy and who mounted the attack.

About Washington Wire

Washington Wire is one of the oldest standing features in American journalism. Since the Wire launched on Sept. 20, 1940, the Journal has offered readers an informal look at the capital. Now online, the Wire provides a succession of glimpses at what’s happening behind hot stories and warnings of what to watch for in the days ahead. The Wire is led by Reid J. Epstein, with contributions from the rest of the bureau. Washington Wire now also includes Think Tank, our home for outside analysis from policy and political thinkers.